C.V. KARTHIKEYAN, J.

1. This appeal has been filed against the dismissal of O.S. No. 15 of 2007, by the learned Principal District Judge, Pudukkottai, by judgment, dated 30.09.2009.

2. The plaintiffs are the appellants. The plaintiffs had filed O.S. No. 15 of 2007, seeking compensation for the death of their 12 years old son, by electrocution. In the suit, they had sought a judgment and decree for a sum of Rs. 12,10,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Ten Thousand only). They had instituted the suit as indigent persons. The suit was dismissed. This appeal has also been presented by them as indigent persons.

3. It is the case of the plaintiffs that on 07.11.2003, their son, Pandi alias Pandithurai, aged about 12 years, had died due to electrocution by stepping on a cut live wire, when he was going to have his bath at around 08.00 a.m. along with his friends at Nainankollai Village, in the field of Ramalingam, where, there were banana plantations. While going to have his bath, the said Pandi alias Pandithurai, stepped on a cut live wire, which was a High Tension wire and suffered electrocution and died on the spot itself. He was taken to the Government Hospital and was declared as brought dead. In this connection, a First Information Report was also preferred with the local Police Station. The body of the deceased boy, who died owing to electrocution, was also handed over to the Doctors, who conducted the post- mortem and also gave a report. The plaintiffs sought compensation from the defendants, who are the Superintending Engineer, Assistant Engineer and Junior Engineer of the Electricity Board, claiming that because of their negligence, the High Tension wire was lying unattended in the field and that a duty and responsibility was cast upon the defendants to take care regarding any live cut wire. The plaintiffs also stated that the deceased was their only son and even though he was aged about 12 years and was studying in 5th Standard, he used to provide an income of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) to the family. He also looked after his two sisters. Claiming that the death of their son is unfortunate and they had to incur financial loss and also loss of future earnings, future care, love and affection, the suit had been filed as stated above, claiming a sum of Rs. 12,10,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Ten Thousand only) as compensation together with interest and costs.

4. The third defendant filed a written statement which was adopted by the defendants nos. 1 and 2. In the said written statement, the third defendant denied that the death of the son of the plaintiffs, namely, Pandi alias Pandithurai was due to the negligence of the defendants. The defendants put up a new case stating that one Mariyappa Konar was cutting the plantains from the banana trees and at that time, he accidentally cut the overhead wire, which fell on the neighbouring tree and caused electric sparks. The said Mariyappa Konar, fled away from the scene. The deceased came to the said garden to pluck plantains and got into contact with the cut electric wire and owing to that electric shock, he died. The defendants, therefore, stated that they were not negligent for the live wire being cut or the live wire being left unattended. They stated that the complaint was not given by Mariyappa Konar, regarding the presence of live cut wire in the field. They have further stated that the deceased should have taken more care and he died, while trying to pluck the plantains and the plaintiffs have no cause of action as against the defendants. They have further stated that if at all the plaintiffs seek compensation, they should seek compensation only against the said Mariyappa Konar.

5. The parties went to trial on the basis of rival pleadings. The learned Principal District Judge, Pudukkottai framed three issues for consideration, namely:

1. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the compensation amount of Rs. 12,10,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Ten Thousand only) from the def